[Scons-dev] Subprocess issue on Linux?

[Dirk Bächle]

Hi there,

On 01.04.2014 18:13, Gary Oberbrunner wrote:

>

> I've found posix spawn can be much faster than fork/exec with large 

> memory processes, so I'd be in favor of this. Not every system has it 

> though so there would have to be a fallback to fork/exec.

>

> -- 

> Gary Oberbrunner

> (sent from my Android)

>

> On Apr 1, 2014 11:52 AM, "Kenny, Jason L" <jason.l.kenny at intel.com 

> <mailto:jason.l.kenny at intel.com>> wrote:

>

>     Hi guys,

>

>     I just got a patch to Parts internal at Intel to fix some issues

>     with subprocess. I find myself sort of surprised by this, and

>     honestly felt that this seems to be an issue that should be looked

>     at in Scons as well.

>

>      [...]

>

>     Does anyone else have input on this? IF this is a good patch, it

>     seem that we will want to apply it to SCons, for a speed boost.

>


a few minutes ago I updated the page

   http://www.scons.org/wiki/WhySconsIsNotSlow

with my latest results. Check out the bottom of the page, and the repository

   http://www.bitbucket.org/dirkbaechle/scons_testresults

for all the results. I'm also talking to Tzvetan Mikov off-list, he 
volunteered to write a CPython extension for posix_spawn() to help SCons 
out. I'll try to get him subscribed to this list, so the three of you 
can talk some more about this, okay?

Best regards,

Dirk

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://two.pairlist.net/pipermail/scons-dev/attachments/20140401/65dd7dd8/attachment.htm>